|
I think a better reason needs to be found for not doing a races book because some posters were in a game or witnessed a game that had too many non-standard player races. To be blunt who cares really. It's up to the DM to say what and is not allowed. Is it a hassle to have to decide what is or is not allowed yes. Don't be a DM if you do not want that responsability. It does add more work for a DM true yet I rather hear that than be told it's a bad thing because they keep cropping up in games.
I think it's something that is needed. 3.5 allowed non-standard races Pathfinder should too. They need to add options that will draw the 3.5 crowd away from 3.5. Make their game compitable with 3.5 while also making it stand out. It's all good to rely on 3pp yet they also need to be careful with that and not end up helping out their competition too much either. Not to mention Pathfinder cannot imo survive by APs alone. It does not have to be tied to Galorian either it can be a stand alone book or a PDF.
To be honest I always thought the developers wanting to keep level of rules bloat down admirable yet at the same time naive. Eventually you cannot keep that from happening. As more and more releases for Pathinder and Pathfinder 3pp continues you will get more and more rules. It's inevitable.
It's funny reading about how poster accuse Wotc of ding so with 3.5 when they convientlly forget that like Pathfinder they started with a few books and more were added. It's not like they woke up one day and decided to release 3.5 with the intention of rules bloat happening. It happen with all rpgs and rpg companies. No matter how much you like Pathfinder and Paizo. Their not immune to that imo
And for once can we have a discussion without some sort of "look how bad 4E is because it allows more options" It's getting old and your comparing wrong editions. 3.5. also allowed you to play non-standard races.
Lets not forget that the Tome of Horrors comlete from FFG will more than likely also have more non-standard races and rules to use them as PC too. As I said you cannot escape this. Unless you do not buy the book or disallow stuff from the start
Would it be possible to have a nicely designed, detailed, expanded and balanced supplement about races from a player perspective? I'd say a book offering a lot of new races, with for each a presentation (including size and age generation; quite like in the rulebook) and customization options (like in the Advanced Player's) including the possibility to generate half-breeds.
Maybe some environmental feats, specific prestige classes and equipment pieces would complete it perfectly...
This would definitely offer more options to players and a little help to GM to handle it.It can work if there is a campaign setting that goes with all those new races. Many games would change in ascetically unpleasing ways if there were a lot of new PC races. This, IMHO happened in 4th edition D&D. The races are cool, but it ends up making many of the settings seem less real than what is best for even high fantasy.
A new world that was like, say, Talislanta, would work well with a bunch of new races. But Golarion proabably would not.
And nobody, nobody, has said that Golarion should. However, the Core Rules, and I don't know how many times I have to post this, are setting neutral. So offering as many races as you want in them has no affect on Golarion. It only offers options for GMs and Players in other NON GOLARION worlds.
|
|
I think a better reason needs to be found for not doing a races book because some posters were in a game or witnessed a game that had too many non-standard player races.
...
To be honest I always thought the developers wanting to keep level of rules bloat down admirable yet at the same time naive. Eventually you cannot keep that from happening. As more and more releases for Pathinder and Pathfinder 3pp continues you will get more and more rules. It's inevitable.It's funny reading about how poster accuse Wotc of ding so with 3.5 when they convientlly forget that like Pathfinder they started with a few books and more were added. It's not like they woke up one day and decided to release 3.5 with the intention of rules bloat happening. It happen with all rpgs and rpg companies. No matter how much you like Pathfinder and Paizo. Their not immune to that imo
a) Power creep. Dilution of developer effort and subsequent suffering in quality of output. Some people prefer a deep and narrow focus to shallow and broad. Etc.
b) Even if you believe it to be so, inevitable failure doesn't necessary mean they should stop trying and start churning out the endless stream of splatbooks WoTC foisted on us.c) The problem many people have with WoTC, myself included, is not that they released 'more and more' books, but that they released 'crappier and crappier' books over time. Paizo's done a good job of sticking to their guns, not trying to cater to everyone in an equally mediocre fashion, and releasing quality product year after year. If they do decide to do an alt races book, I hope they do it to the hilt, but honestly I'd rather see more about what's already on the books than yet another version of the sea elf.
In my own view, Paizo's staff has a finite amount of output for a given month. While I'm not a fan of a menagerie of PC races book, personally, if they have time to do it - great. Pathfinder's still in sort of a young game, though, and there are much more important things I'd like to see them concentrate their talents on (such as fixing magic items & crafting, patching up some of the holes in the ruleset, and exorcising some of the more broken aspects of 3.5). So, no, opposition to a new Savage Species isn't entirely because 'some posters were in a game or witnessed a game that had too many non-standard player races'.
|
And nobody, nobody, has said that Golarion should. However, the Core Rules, and I don't know how many times I have to post this, are setting neutral. So offering as many races as you want in them has no affect on Golarion. It only offers options for GMs and Players in other NON GOLARION worlds.
So, for instance, when the APG came out it wasn't followed by a module set on Golarion with APG iconics for the players to run?
I expect we will see expanded chase, haunt and disease rules from the GMG used in APs and modules.
Staff have already said that we will see some APG classes in APs (perhaps we already have, I'm not reading Serpents Skull so that I can play in it).
Your perspective is the core rules are setting neutral but a different yet equally valid perspective is that Golarion is not rules neutral.
It does not surprise me that staff comments on the RPG threads might be slanted a little differently to posts in the Campaign Setting threads, or in 'Ask James Jacobs'. A little bit of AFAIK goes a long way, especially online.
|
|
a) Power creep. Dilution of developer effort and subsequent suffering in quality of output. Some people prefer a deep and narrow focus to shallow and broad. Etc.
Which we have not seen so far yet it can and i think eventually will happen. As the brand continues you will see more and more fans ask for more and more newer things. Some which will have Power Creep. I think it's inevitable really.
b) Even if you believe it to be so, inevitable failure doesn't necessary mean they should stop trying and start churning out the endless stream of splatbooks WoTC foisted on us.
The thing is posters forget Paizo is a business to release a quality product and to make a profit. Do not think Paizo is any different. They have bills and staff to pay. Do I want the endless stream of books no. Yet I can see Paizo doing a better job than Wotc in terms of quality control. More books does not automatically = bad. For now their model of less releases seems to be working. Eventually it might not. Fans cannot expect Paizo to tkae a loss becuase they want less books. I'ts just not going to happen. Situations change and Paizo needs to adapt.
c) The problem many people have with WoTC, myself included, is not that they released 'more and more' books, but that they released 'crappier and crappier' books over time. Paizo's done a good job of sticking to their guns, not trying to cater to everyone in an equally mediocre fashion, and releasing quality product year after year. If they do decide to do an alt races book, I hope they do it to the hilt, but honestly I'd rather see more about what's already on the books than yet another version of the sea elf.
And it amy very well happen with Paizo too. I do not want it to by any means but being Paizo does not make them immune from releasing the odd bad book. It's good tothink your favored rpg publisher can do no wrong but sometimes it just happens. And who knows finincailly if they may have to release books of lesser quality. No business at least a smart one is going to run at a loss becuase the fans want it to. Anyone that does imodeserves to go under.
Paizo for all thei talk of being freindly with 3pp really does not want you to buy from them. Why would they your buying the competition product. Friendly competitor but a competitor nonetheless. And really they should offer as much if not more than 3pp in house. Wotc created Paizo with the OGL. Paizo should encourage 3pp not create a potential cmpetitor. Of course this does not have to be all done right now this instant. They should make plans to develop psionics, epic play. Alternatiove race books and anything else that 3.5 offered that for the moment they do not have. Paizo has to push their products first. 3pp last.
So far they have done an excellant job and really it kind of mystifies me that fans would automatically assume that more books by Paizo would make Paizo somehow incompetant in that regard all of sudden. I can understand posters not wanting to buy or invest in more books. To use the argument that more books would automatically mean a drop in quality in both books and staff output is just an excuse imo for not wanting to purchase more books.
So, for instance, when the APG came out it wasn't followed by a module set on Golarion with APG iconics for the players to run?I expect we will see expanded chase, haunt and disease rules from the GMG used in APs and modules.
Staff have already said that we will see some APG classes in APs (perhaps we already have, I'm not reading Serpents Skull so that I can play in it).
Your perspective is the core rules are setting neutral but a different yet equally valid perspective is that Golarion is not rules neutral.
** spoiler omitted **
Yes, you did see the new base classes in the APs. Did you see every class option presented in the APs? Did you see every spell in the APG in the APs?
My perspective is, the core rules are setting neutral, and Golarion uses a subset of the core rules plus additional rules not in the core. I don't use the APs, but there's enough bleedover on the forums that people are always asking in the RPG forums about things statted up in the APs. Which means there are things in Golarion which are not in the core rules, and vice versa. Golarion uses a subset of the core rules, so again, we're back to Paizo having the choice over what is in Golarion and what is not.
To put it another way, if Paizo decides that there is a race of 20 foot tall robot clowns that look like animorphs that have two factions, the Decepticlowns and the Autoclowns, there isn't a thing stopping them from statting those two races up in an AP and adding them to Golarion. Nor is there anything stopping them from adding that race to the core rules and never using them in Golarion. So the argument is really kind of pointless, in that Paizo can do whatever they want, whenever they want. So if you never want another race put into a book, you're out of luck. If you want more races added to Golarion, you're out of luck. The only thing they might consider doing is adding races to the Core and not to Golarion.
No problem, I was kind of annoyed when I posted anyway, personal issues involving an alcoholic family member in denial, so all my buttons were easy to push. Sorry if I came off as antagonistic.
|
|
More books does not automatically = bad.
More books in the same time period significantly reduces the chance of good, though.
Paizo for all thei talk of being freindly with 3pp really does not want you to buy from them. Why would they your buying the competition product. Friendly competitor but a competitor nonetheless. And really they should offer as much if not more than 3pp in house. Wotc created Paizo with the OGL. Paizo should encourage 3pp not create a potential cmpetitor. Of course this does not have to be all done right now this instant. They should make plans to develop psionics, epic play. Alternatiove race books and anything else that 3.5 offered that for the moment they do not have. Paizo has to push their products first. 3pp last.
This is heading out a bit on a tangent, but I think you are missing the point here. Paizo has to weigh cost vs benefit on every product they release. Psionics, epic play, a tome of assorted exotic races, these are things that not every gamer who bought the core rules is going to want. They are niche. They are risky. They may sell some, they may sell not at all. They are the *perfect* thing for Paizo to let 3PP take on, because if they fail, it's no skin of their back, and if they succeed, the 'Pathfinder Compatible' logo on the cover provides some incidental benefit to Paizo. And if 3PP Expansion Product X is a runaway success, they can always pull a Microsoft and fold an 'official' version of the expanded rules into the core product - the 3PP has already done all the playtesting for them, and nothing outsells Brand Y like an 'official' edition (I don't really think Paizo would do this, just mentioning for the sake of argument).
Put another way: What sells more, a PHB2-type product, or a Expanded Psionics handbook?
So far they have done an excellant job and really it kind of mystifies me that fans would automatically assume that more books by Paizo would make Paizo somehow incompetant in that regard all of sudden. I can understand posters not wanting to buy or invest in more books. To use the argument that more books would automatically mean a drop in quality in both books and staff output is just an excuse imo for not wanting to purchase more books.
I would love to buy more books, particularly more books I would enjoy reading and would use in play. This grab bag of PC races isn't one of them. Rather than (IMO) waste time on a book I'm not likely to crack the cover on, I'd rather they release something like the APG again, but more awesome. It's purely selfish, I know. I'm not even sure why I'm debating it at this point. LOUD NOISES!
More books does not automatically = bad.More books in the same time period significantly reduces the chance of good, though.
Paizo for all thei talk of being freindly with 3pp really does not want you to buy from them. Why would they your buying the competition product. Friendly competitor but a competitor nonetheless. And really they should offer as much if not more than 3pp in house. Wotc created Paizo with the OGL. Paizo should encourage 3pp not create a potential cmpetitor. Of course this does not have to be all done right now this instant. They should make plans to develop psionics, epic play. Alternatiove race books and anything else that 3.5 offered that for the moment they do not have. Paizo has to push their products first. 3pp last.This is heading out a bit on a tangent, but I think you are missing the point here. Paizo has to weigh cost vs benefit on every product they release. Psionics, epic play, a tome of assorted exotic races, these are things that not every gamer who bought the core rules is going to want. They are niche. They are risky. They may sell some, they may sell not at all. They are the *perfect* thing for Paizo to let 3PP take on, because if they fail, it's no skin of their back, and if they succeed, the 'Pathfinder Compatible' logo on the cover provides some incidental benefit to Paizo. And if 3PP Expansion Product X is a runaway success, they can always pull a Microsoft and fold an 'official' version of the expanded rules into the core product - the 3PP has already done all the playtesting for them, and nothing outsells Brand Y like an 'official' edition (I don't really think Paizo would do this, just mentioning for the sake of argument).
Put another way: What sells more, a PHB2-type product, or a Expanded Psionics handbook?
So far they have done an excellant job and really it kind of mystifies me that fans would automatically assume that more books by Paizo would make Paizo somehow incompetant in that...
Unfortunately, this is kinda a false assumption, your assuming to be the majority with the majority opinion. At least thats what I think your trying to say, to paraphrase; you don't think there is enough of an interest in such a product to warrant it's creation.
However there has been people, myself included, who play in non-Golarion specific setting, and don't use the adventure paths. Does this make developing these products risky then, or is the mass majority using Golarion. I'm not going to assume I know the answer to that, and I think you shouldn't assume either.
When the APG was announced there was more then a few detractors on these boards who though such a book was a waste of time, especially pointing to class bloat as a potential problem. They where wrong, because they assumed to know what people wanted based on their own wants and desires, a false assumption.
Now I personally think in eight more possible years of pathfinder products fitting in a single book with 3-5 more races stated out isn't going to destroy pathfinder. It's actually kind of silly to assume it would. 3.5 didn't die or go under, WOTC just chose to make a 4th edition while 3.5 was still popular, and whatever their philosophy was it was working their still using it to sale 4th edition books. Which still sale well.
The only reason I'm fine without having a true race book, is simply because the bestiaries are race books, which is actually smart as these books are traditionally just for GM's. This allows for play groups with non-traditional races.
|
|
More books in the same time period significantly reduces the chance of good, though.
Possbily but really I do not see a slight increase in more books an automatic fail in terms of quality. Paizo are not noobs to thsi why do poster insist on assuming the worst can happen. Unless alllthe developer are asleep at the wheel so to s[eak I do not see it happen.
This is heading out a bit on a tangent, but I think you are missing the point here. Paizo has to weigh cost vs benefit on every product they release. Psionics, epic play, a tome of assorted exotic races, these are things that not every gamer who bought the core rules is going to want. They are niche. They are risky. They may sell some, they may sell not at all. They are the *perfect* thing for Paizo to let 3PP take on, because if they fail, it's no skin of their back, and if they succeed, the 'Pathfinder Compatible' logo on the cover provides some incidental benefit to Paizo. And if 3PP Expansion Product X is a runaway success, they can always pull a Microsoft and fold an 'official' version of the expanded rules into the core product - the 3PP has already done all the playtesting for them, and nothing outsells Brand Y like an 'official' edition (I don't really think Paizo would do this, just mentioning for the sake of argument).
Sorry I sometimes go inot tangents. Ever since I lost a lot of weight I seem to have more to say. Not necessairly on topic for which I apologize.
I understand your point and to a certain extent I agree with yet Paizo needs to be careful in not creating their competition the same way Wotc did with Paizo and other 3pps. It's all great to be everyone freind in the business until it starts to hurt your profit margin. Who knows maybe in 5 years time it might end up being a mistake. races book is not needed as much yet a psionicsand epic play book is. Your trying to get gamers away from 3.5 which is not going to happen if 3.5 offers options you do not. 3pp are a solution yet some Dms refuse to use anything but official Pathfinder material. And who knows when and if a 3pp will ever do a Epic level book.
I like Pathfinder yet if I still had my 3.5 books i would have never made the switch. I may have bought the PDf of the core PF book yet 3.5 was pretty complete. I have the same problem with my gaming group. The 3.5 holdouts. They will play yet not upgrade. For them the rules are not as complete. They have zero interest unfortunetly in filling out what they consider gaps in the PF rules with 3pp. You mention it being a niche yet if your not going to offer whast 3.5 can it will remain a niche imo.
As I said eventually. In the future. Thry cannot imo survive on Aps alone.
Put another way: What sells more, a PHB2-type product, or a Expanded Psionics handbook?
Actually I think both imo. The first because everyone wants more options and the second because it's missing from the rules. Their is 3pp support that some Dms will not touch with a 10 foot pole. Remember gamers are completist imo. I have everything in hardcover from Paizo. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I would love to buy more books, particularly more books I would enjoy reading and would use in play. This grab bag of PC races isn't one of them. Rather than (IMO) waste time on a book I'm not likely to crack the cover on, I'd rather they release something like the APG again, but more awesome. It's purely selfish, I know. I'm not even sure why I'm debating it at this point. LOUD NOISES!
I think we can agree that we want to see more books. to be honest as time passes I thin kwe both will not be using every book let alone looking thorough every PF to use it. I bought almost everything for 3.5 from Wotc and I barely looked through half of it. Eventually why bother unless a players request to use a book or you need to look a rule. It happens with every rpg line once you pass the 10 book mark.
i personally want to see more PC races, i want to see new concepts that were never in 3.x.
i am a big fan of new material and will always welcome it, besides if i dont like something i can choose not to use it.
i personally want to see more PC races, i want to see new concepts that were never in 3.x.
i am a big fan of new material and will always welcome it, besides if i dont like something i can choose not to use it.
+1!!!!
I think Paizo needs a new product line... call it "Campaign Options". A home for things that don't fit into Golarion or the Pathfinder RPG line. Things like a race / Savage Species type book, alternate rules books (i.e. a new magic system or combat systems -- complete replacements for the current core systems or an Unearthed Arcana type book), psionics, epic level rules (including mass combat and kingdom building), that type of thing. Maybe include alternate one off settings (a non-Golarion setting book with no or limited further support). Someplace where they could "let their hair down" and indulge those ideas that just don't fit into Golarion or the PFRPG core line... work out those creative urges that just don't fit the other lines. Labelling it an "options" line makes it clear that it's not core or Golarion, that it's strictly optional for any game...
More risk, questionable sales, but an opportunity to take the game down other avenues. Explore different ways of addressing game issues. Wouldn't that be fun?
I wanted to ask Ismellmonkey are you responding to me or Apethae or both of us? Not sure if your responding to myself or the other poster.
Apethea
Sorry I shouldn't had quoted the whole thing.
I was just trying to say that only Paizo's knows what's going to sale or not. I can't make that assumption, nobody on these boards who's not part of the industry can. A race book may or may not sale, but making an assumption it will or wont doesn't equal much. So it's purely up to Paizo's to decide to do a race book. I just think within eight or more years of Pathfinder products, we may see one.
What else are they going to do nothing but adventure paths?
.
..
...
....
.....
::
Quasi-OT: I don't mind how much fluff the powers that be dredge up from the back of their collective sofi as larry-long johns all the kinks and cronies in the foundations - the core mechanics/rule sets - are battered into submission first.
As for additional races -- of all the extra fluff that you can homebrew, races are one of the easiest to manage/create - start small, get clever when it/they work reliably.
::
Let's be honest - we don't need official sanction to brew a cat -folk race and really, everyone is going to have their own wants demanding fulfillment regarding such a race/other fantasy-iconic races (cat-dude, dog-dude, stone-dude, fire-dude, mechno-dude, tormented soul-dude, shapeshifter-dude, walking weapon-dude, slave to X-dude and all the rest of it..)
...so learn to brew your own. Throw your ideas around, bounce them off your friends, the forums, wherever.
::
--- Now, for all the non-fantasy iconic races, the stuff you don't immediately recognise/summon to mind when pondering new races - the fluffly other stuff (race X with its awesome back story and exscuse for Y racials and Z stat mods)..
..well, I wouldn't miss it if it never came to be. I realise the sometimes people fall for a well written racial idea but many a time people are simply looking for a new set of modifiers, via stat mods, racials and the like, to tinker with/run through play/build a character with.
Which is cool n' all but why wait for a release? Brew your own.
Aaaaw go on!
-.o
ORC POWER!
ORC POWER!
ORC POWER!
CAN'T KEEP THE GREEN DOWN!
::
At one time, the above made..
Two of the most absurd argument in this thread are thus:
"Paizo shouldn't add more races because I played a game with a lot of [what the author considers] non-standard races and it was terrible. Not because it was unbalanced, but because there were a lot of races!"
and
"If Paizo keeps adding books, there will be power creep and rules bloat!"
1) I am FAIRLY CERTAIN every Golarion specific book Paizo has released contains some sort of new rule. Congratulations, Paizo is already introducing new rules with every book - except they are setting specific. However, setting specific rules are the ones most likely to be affected by power creep and least likely to be supported in further releases.
2) Some one playing a Goliath breaks your suspension of disbelief so we can't have more than Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Half-Orcs and Half-Elves (but not Half-Dwarves, Half-Halflings, or Half-Gnomes). Ok, JUST having those races and no others breaks my suspension of disbelief. There. Now who wins?
There is no reason not to include a section of the Monster Manuals dedicated to certain races properly balanced for PCs (there is no reason to create an entire dedicated book). I don't care if Monster Manuals are for DMs. That's a stupid statement unless you find some sort of magic that prevents non-DMs from perusing them, never mind discouraging non-DMs from buying Monster Manuals. I don't care if Paizo wants all released material to by Golarion centric, even the general stuff that is not explicitly Golarion specific. I am going to be frank - that is dumb. Outside of the Golarion specific books, the majority of the rule books are going to be used by people for games that have nothing to do with the APs or even the world of Golarion. And Paizo should have been in the game long enough to recognize that "general rule books" are going to sell more than setting specific books BECAUSE they are "general rule books" and can be used in any sort of game. You don't have to make a "Dogfolk of Golarion" or provide a bunch of racial replacement abilities or Dogfolk-specific feats or abilities if you include a "Player Races" section of a Monster Manual, but the argument that Dogfolk can't be made or included as player races because they wouldn't fit in Golarion is BEYOND short-sighted.
I'd like to see such a book. But, I'd like it to focus on new options for the existing races, as a way to keep them fresh as well as a method for introducing racial offshoots or, with a few changes to the fluff, entirely new races. It would be cool if:
1. It contained new racial traits to add/replace the existing traits.
2. Alternate class features for different races (Note, this includes humans).
3. Prestige classes designed for certain racial groups ( a dwarven giant-hunter, for example).
4. New feats for specific races, as a way of keeping them fresh and offering new option (again, this includes humans. The lack of human special feats is irksome.)
|
2) Some one playing a Goliath breaks your suspension of disbelief so we can't have more than Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Half-Orcs and Half-Elves (but not Half-Dwarves, Half-Halflings, or Half-Gnomes). Ok, JUST having those races and no others breaks my suspension of disbelief. There. Now who wins?
There is no reason not to include a section of the Monster Manuals dedicated to certain races properly balanced for PCs (there is no reason to create an entire dedicated book).
1. You lost me at half-halflings. Wouldn't they be called Quarterlings? :P
2. The Bestiaries include information with some monster races for running them as PCs. It's not as in-depth as the big seven, but there's also less audience for them.
3. Goblins of Golarion is coming up after Halflings of Golarion. I have a feeling that it will include much more expansive rules for goblin PCs. And I'd wager that Kobolds of Golarion won't be far behind.
4. I don't know if it's intentional or not, but Paizo seem to be leaving some areas undeveloped for 3PP to work with. A good recent example would be Psionics Unleashed, a book that is apparently doing phenomenally well. It works out great, because while Paizo has expressed that they're largely indifferent to psionics, Dreamscarred Press loves psionics, and put out a quality psionics book that integrates really well with the official Pathfinder material.
5. Piggybacking off of point #4, if Paizo isn't wild about developing it, I'd rather they not. So far, Paizo's output for their system has been of very high quality. But putting out a supplement because they feel they should, as opposed to because they want to, would almost certainly show in the final product.
5. Piggybacking off of point #4, if Paizo isn't wild about developing it, I'd rather they not. So far, Paizo's output for their system has been of very high quality. But putting out a supplement because they feel they should, as opposed to because they want to, would almost certainly show in the final product.
Some Paizo staff (such as the creative director) are not thrilled about the idea of monstrous PCs. This does not mean that all of Paizo is not thrilled with the idea.
Sean K. Reynolds (of Savage Species fame) has stated several times that he would be interested in making such a book. And said Creative Director has stated that when/if they do one (and it's more of a when than if from his posts) that Sean would almost certainly be in charge of such an effort, because he has enthusiasm for it.
This is gleaned from several threads just like this one I've read on the RPG forum. If there have been other sentiments posted on a different forum (such as the AP forum) I have no knowledge of that.
Just thought I'd point this out.
|
|
+1!!!!i personally want to see more PC races, i want to see new concepts that were never in 3.x.
i am a big fan of new material and will always welcome it, besides if i dont like something i can choose not to use it.
+2 This is what bothers me aout posters who do not want to see new material. You do not have to buy it nor use it any game. Their is no gun pointed at your head forcing you to do so. If you do not want the resposnability of saying yes and no to what is allowed at your game table do not become a DM. Eventually a situation will arise that you will have to male that type of judgemetn call.
Cartigan your latest post pretty much agree and seconded.
|
|
I do not know if it's just me yet everytime a thread like this comes out the usual litany of "no do not publish more rules" seems to always come up. While I understand not wanting new rules why pick up Pathfinder in the first place. It was pretty much guaranteed they would publish more new rules. Why pick up an rpg and support a company you know is going to do the oppposite ogf what you want in terms of new rules.
I do not know if it's just me yet everytime a thread like this comes out the usual litany of "no do not publish more rules" seems to always come up. While I understand not wanting new rules why pick up Pathfinder in the first place. It was pretty much guaranteed they would publish more new rules. Why pick up an rpg and support a company you know is going to do the oppposite ogf what you want in terms of new rules.
I agree with this. If the rpg is going to thrive, new products have to come out. This of course means new rules. With more rules will come the inevidable "power creep" as new options are introduced. This is a good thing, IMO; unless the rpg continues to grow, it will stagnate and die.
If you want an rpg that will not introduce new rules, then my advice would be to play one of the "dead" systems, like AD&D.
|
|
I do not know if it's just me yet everytime a thread like this comes out the usual litany of "no do not publish more rules" seems to always come up. While I understand not wanting new rules why pick up Pathfinder in the first place. It was pretty much guaranteed they would publish more new rules. Why pick up an rpg and support a company you know is going to do the oppposite ogf what you want in terms of new rules.
Wanna know why I default to the "less is more" mode? Because of 3.X:
175 Base classes782 Prestige classes
if you dont want the new material then dont buy it, just because you dont want something doesnt mean others dont as well.
there is always room for new material and the fear of power creep and rules bloat wont prevent it, the big thing is if you prevent new material than the game is basicly dead because not everyone plays just using the AP's, many people play homebrewed games.
it is easy enough to not buy a new book or to disallow new material from a game but it is not really fair to say i dont want it in my game so dont make it for anyone else.
i would love to see a race book giving new races and backround of those races, there is definently a market for it as well as new options for the exsiting races.
While I wouldn't want to see more races, I would like to see a deeper backstory on each of the core races, and maybe sub-races.
Furthermore, I'd like to see more feats, items and prestige classes exclusively for those races.
|
|
Wanna know why I default to the "less is more" mode? Because of 3.X:
175 Base classes
782 Prestige
classes
I understand and respect that yet why invest in an rpg that you know will eventuaslly have the same problem. Sure the Dev at Paizo can promise not to let it get out of control yet they are still a business and they cannot imo take a loss because some do not want to see new material. Not to mention imo it's not something they should have ever even hinted at because it raises false hopes in some of the fanabse and its not something that can every really be implemented.
I'm guessing a lot of Paizo's revenue is from Adventure Paths and other Modules, which are not rule books, so there may be less "rules bloat" and less "power creep" in Pathfinder. Also, the introduction of archetypes keeps the base classes balanced against future classes because there are more options for specialization, customizing, and niches.
That said, I think it IS a good idea to have relatively focused "splatbooks." That way, people can pick and choose which ones they buy and use. For example, I would like a races book, but wouldn't like an artifacts book. But just because I don't want an artifact book doesn't mean there shouldn't be an artifact book. I imagine a lot of people really like artifacts.
I'm guessing a lot of Paizo's revenue is from Adventure Paths and other Modules, which are not rule books, so there may be less "rules bloat" and less "power creep" in Pathfinder. Also, the introduction of archetypes keeps the base classes balanced against future classes because there are more options for specialization, customizing, and niches.
That said, I think it IS a good idea to have relatively focused "splatbooks." That way, people can pick and choose which ones they buy and use. For example, I would like a races book, but wouldn't like an artifacts book. But just because I don't want an artifact book doesn't mean there shouldn't be an artifact book. I imagine a lot of people really like artifacts.
Yep,
I don't use APs, so they're not getting any money from me on those. Honestly, nobody I've ever played with or run for used APs, it was all housebrewed. And this is from someone who's been playing or running for the better part of a quarter century now.But, I'm one of those completionist guys, and I love having options books. I'm going to pick up the psionics unleashed book that is being put out by a 3PP soon (soon as I free up some funds for it), and also am looking at a 3PP Arms & Equipment Guide that's being talked up.
I would buy just about any core rulebook expansion, unless it's something silly (like Giant Robot Bikini Bimbo Summoner Unleashed). Hmm, actually, I'd probably buy the silly one as well but just for reading and not to use in game (I love my Steve Jackson's Guide to Munchkins).
I think part of the arguments in threads like these stem from the fact there are two major variations on Paizo fans. The original AP fans who were here before they launched PF, and the PF fans who have come to the forums for the RPG since it's been in Beta.
It seems like the AP fans want a minimalist approach to the RPG, because to them, Golarion is the gold standard and nothing must affect it in a way they don't like. Whereas the RPG fans want more options for the RPG and couldn't give a flying fig about Golarion (guess which group I'm in). :)
then there those of us who have seen it all and wouldn't mind it but at the same time do not want the insanity that was the 3.5 splat books. And yes their was a lot of them, some were good, a lot of them though... were atrocious. I can say with 100% certainty that the BoED was broken, im not even sure WOTC even playtested any of that material. Most of the new races they added i know people i've played with didn't care for (and i am including everyone online as well). War forged were interesting, kind of steampunkish in a way.
Would i like to see a races book? not really its just not something that interests me...More monsters, More options for the current races, and Options for the races listed in the Bestiary 1-2, more Archetypes (im really digging those :)), more feats, and more info about Galorian or hell another campaign setting entirely (I like the ones made by the companies when they make sense and tell well written stories...)
As to Buying a splat book with a whole bunch of new races... I would rather have a book talking about how to make balanced races, and describing the process (something akin to the Gamemastery guide) because not only would it be an interesting read (and maybe show me something i missed) but it would also help out people who haven't been gaming since about 93 or earlier.
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day; Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime" Know what i mean?
Anyway... my 2 cp
(I'm the rare breed in the middle and Looks at these arguments from both sides.)
See, I would really enjoy that concept.
A races book that combines monstrous PC rules, a small handful of detailed races, and a rules system for building balanced races, with the handful of detailed races as examples of how the building rules work.
|
See, I would really enjoy that concept.
A races book that combines monstrous PC rules, a small handful of detailed races, and a rules system for building balanced races, with the handful of detailed races as examples of how the building rules work.
This I could do. A book which is just a catalog of new races turns my blood cold. This would be something different entirely. Here is the book that would guide you through making a 0-HD humanoid playable. We could have some guidelines for half-race concepts with workable rules, not just suggestions for GM fiat. It also serves Paizo's guideline of "get it done in one book". I like this: Ultimate Races, not a catalog, a toolkit.
This I could do. A book which is just a catalog of new races turns my blood cold. This would be something different entirely. Here is the book that would guide you through making a 0-HD humanoid playable. We could have some guidelines for half-race concepts with workable rules, not just suggestions for GM fiat. It also serves Paizo's guideline of "get it done in one book". I like this: Ultimate Races, not a catalog, a toolkit.See, I would really enjoy that concept.
A races book that combines monstrous PC rules, a small handful of detailed races, and a rules system for building balanced races, with the handful of detailed races as examples of how the building rules work.
I'd sure buy it.
Me too.
I'm generally with mdt, SmiloDan, northbrb and Cartigan here. Getting some more diverse races wouldn't hurt anyone.
If you don't like it, don't use it, but just because some guy doesn't want non-human races it doesn't mean nobody should have them. Not all of Pathfinder is being played in Golarion either, maybe some GM's do prefer their Setting to have a more racially diverse civilization. There's no reason not to let that happen.
And the argument that more races must have more support for each individual race is moot in my opinion. Why MUST they have it? I mean sure it would be nice if my Borogove had some borogove specific feats to choose from, but it isn't necessary, I'm already happy that I can play a Borogove at all. Tons of race specific feats aren't necessary, it's completely fine for me if only humans and their more oddly shaped cousins recieve racial feats and options, I can work with the race.
Better to have a cool race with generic options that are still ok and more than enough to customize my character to style, than to have a race that I absolutely don't want to play and have all sorts of cool options.
What good are chocolate crumbs if the cake they go on is made of sour cream and vinegar. I'd rather go with with a blank chocolate cake there.
Well my basic point was that i do not wan't a book filled with nothing but new races... What i would like to see is a book explaining the process that paizo uses behind the balancing and creation of new races. A guide if you will on 0 level races that also has some new feats and other goodies for the original seven but also the new races we have been introduced to in the Bestiary 1-2.
I don't know about you but i am curious to see what the fetchling or the damphir is capable of. I almost leaped for joy when i say the new elemental races, they are a good twist on the original elemental born and i definitely would like to see more on them.
Not saying a couple new races wouldn't be nice but i dont need an entire book of new races. Something more along the lines of a races gamemastery guide like i was saying earlier. I honestly see no need for playing any of the Monsters with HD (Angels, Archons, Demons, Devils, Daemons, Centaurs, Minotaurs).
i says this even though i have a minotaur ranger that i would love having some help converting over (Ruun, Male Minotaur, Ranger 8)
Note: I realize i could just do what i originally did but i'm a stickler for the rules in a system, i LIKE to follow them the best that i can unless i can't... sometimes that happens.
If anything i just want to make sure it's quality work... WOTC had a tendency to rush things, i don't want to that happen here. I would buy a race book only if it was done well, and didn't have an insane plethora of new races. Some examples maybe, but i don't want enough to choke a tarrasque with. If ya catch my meaning :).
Just wanted to make sure i was coming across clearly.
I do not know if it's just me yet everytime a thread like this comes out the usual litany of "no do not publish more rules" seems to always come up. While I understand not wanting new rules why pick up Pathfinder in the first place. It was pretty much guaranteed they would publish more new rules. Why pick up an rpg and support a company you know is going to do the oppposite ogf what you want in terms of new rules.Wanna know why I default to the "less is more" mode? Because of 3.X:
175 Base classes
782 Prestige classes
Of those 175 Base: there are 2 commoners (they are the same), 1 Adept, 1 Aristocrat, 2 Expert (DMG version), 1 Expert (generic UA version),and then classes finally start:
3/5th of them are alternate class features:1 Barbarian, 7 Alternate class Feature Barbarian (trading stuff for stuff).
1 Bard, 9 Alternate class Feature Bard(trading stuff for stuff).
Et cetera and so on.
Heck, APG already did the trade stuff thing. Meaning Pathfinder is up to 100 classes.
Fighter alone in Pathfinder has 12 alternate class features in APG=13 Fighter base classes.
In another thread, someone else (I'll have to find who so I can cite them!) came up with the idea of using a lower point buy for "+1 ECL" races. So, for example, if regular folk get a 25 point buy, the aasimar or tiefling or what-have-you only gets a 20 point buy.
Rules like this might be useful in an Ultimate Races Cookbook.
"How To Serve Elves?"
A 'Good' race is one I want to play or, as a GM, would make an interesting twist in a game I run. A tome of psionic races would be tedious as much as one on endless variations of 'pointy eared tree-hugging' elves. A friend in Atlanta has a staggeringly detailed Elf race that starts with the rulers and wanders down to his takes on Poison Elves and Elfquest wolf Riders. Social status, upbringing, etc all matter and his players love it. Definately not 'more of the same'. Alas, they're still back somewhere in 2ed.
Race books such as Obsidian Twilight generally have too many races and not enough on how they interact RP-wise, although most of that is in OT itself. I swiped several for my game and am having to integrate them sans the OT background (too depressing for someone on my meds). Other 3pp races are easier to bring in, usually replacing poor renditions of my own, but often lack details, etc., that would bind them into a game world. This can be a boon though, as several of my players have eagerly thrown themselves into fleshing out the races. I had no idea that the Elves treat meteor showers as 'dance nights' and can actually predict their occurrance. Or that Elven families celebrate a new child for weeks ahead of the birth and 'sing' the during the delivery, easing the birth. All player added.
I would love to see a Monstrous PC compendium that simply reprinted all the optional races in one place.
I think a PDF guide would be fine, and easily produced.
I might be old fashioned, but Bestiaries are for GM's - not players.